Re: Bring enbd back in Debian?

"Also sprach Bas van Schaik:"
> Hmmm... You've got a point here! Maybe it's a better idea not to split
> the init-script, and put the common init script in a common-package. So,

I haven't split the script. It starts whatever it can as specified
in the server and/or client configs, provided that there is also
the corresponding daemon present.


> the /etc/init.d/enbd script will parse both client and server
> configuration files and will start/stop the clients and servers.
> However, if the scripts detects a server configuration file on a system
> without the enbd-server binaries, it should exit with an error.

Well, I don't think that's right! Debian always is happy leaving config
files around after removing the package. There's no need to error in 
that case (say the server is not present, but its config file is), since
the other daemon (the client, in this case) might still be there and one
wants to maybe start it.  One should just make a best effort to start
what one can.  That's what happens at present (2.4.33, as uploaded a few
minutes ago).

> with the init-script. However, I prefer the splitted setup of the
> configuration files and manpages, but that's just my humble opinion ;).

There's nothing wrong with splitting - it just apparently implies that
the init script should go in a (third) enbd-common or enbd-base package,
since making two scripts, one for each of the split packages, would be
duplication of significant functionality.

I could split off a common library too, if that helps.


At the moment I have made it easy for you to change the sitings of
things via this stuff passed to the compiler ...

  gcc -DCONFDIR="\"/etc\"" -DPIDDIR="\"/var/run\"" -DSTATEDIR="\"/var/state/enbd\""  ...

That's produced in the Makefile (which comes from Makefile.in) and that
needs patching. It produces those values based on sysconfdir,
localstatedir from ./configure, but you probably want to edit the
Makefile.

Peter